How weird. ADHD is largely hereditary. It runs in my family, in a big way. How bizarre to blame breech birth for it. At least they could have picked something like Asperger's that doesn't appear to be hereditary, not directly anyway.
Kiley
Kiley
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Quote:
From reading the Midwifery Archives on vaginal breech birth, it seems much of this is true (but relatively mild) brain damage from aggressively pulling and reefing on the baby to get the head born w/i three minutes to avoid death from apoxia secondary to cord compression. It's interesting that in the UK where they allow more time to birth breeches, (they think cord compression will cause irreversible damage from apoxia in 8 to 111 minutes), they don't have nearly the negative outcome as those in the US.o get the head born quickly.
~BV
Originally Posted by tammyswanson "...There are many who warn that even successful vaginal deliveries of breech babies result in what are called "soft" neurological signs-that is, not brain damage, but Attention Deficit Disorder, dyslexia, hyperactivity, and the like."... |
~BV
I guess they feel they have to drag the baby out of there, darn the consequences, eh? I can understand them being afraid of malpractice, but all the more reason to birth at home.
![]()
You are right about the damage being caused from a too hands on approach to the birth of a breech. It is strictly hands off and allowing the birth to happen. Any pulling causes damage. The video *Normalizing the Breech Delivery* is a GREAT teaching model for anyone planning a breech delivery. They teach "hands off" and are hands off basically for the birth. Just support offered baby until it is time for the lift to give baby to mom.
![]()
Remember it is an assisted birth video. It was a huge help for us when we thought we were delivering a breech baby last time uc.
Thinking from an attendant's perspective, I can see them not wanting to attend a first time mom's breech birth. The thinking being that the pelvis has not proven it's self and that adds a risk to a homebirth that a lot of attendants don't wish to take. Sadly, the hospital offers even worse odds, so UC would be the only way to go imho.
~A
Thinking from an attendant's perspective, I can see them not wanting to attend a first time mom's breech birth. The thinking being that the pelvis has not proven it's self and that adds a risk to a homebirth that a lot of attendants don't wish to take. Sadly, the hospital offers even worse odds, so UC would be the only way to go imho.
~A
Quote:
Sounds like sage advice to me! I think its fear of malpractice lawsuits and also like you said, not being trained to do it anymore...and also there is some arrogance and snootiness thrown in, like it's so 'modern' to just cut the baby out instead of doing an 'old fashioned' breech delivery.
Originally Posted by saskiaofthewoods I read once that most docs are simply afraid they could have to go to court if they do not use c section. No clue why... I read in Ina May Gaskins book that it is not that hard at all to deliver breech babies. Maybe docs do not even learn this anymore? Seriously, I thought about this lately. Maybe somebody who becomes a doctor now does not even learn anymore how a normal, natural birth looks like. They just learn to use their drugs and their machines, so that is what they do. Not because they are mean, but because it is the only thing they know. So they are really trying to do their best. At least some of them.... Maybe we should force them to spend a summer on the farm in Tennessee with Ina May, so they learn something they usually do not learn and they can get a different view. I really think this would help! |
3
That's what the OB said when he refused to attend my breech birth (first baby) - that he used to do them and think nothing of it, but now he was too scared to get sued. He said if something goes wrong because of a c-s, the courts won't generally find the doctor at fault because he was "doing all he could", but if anything went wrong during a vaginal breech birth, he would definitely be blamed. So I guess that's the reasoning a lot of them follow, even though it means a lot of moms get cut open to protect the doctors from lawsuit risk.
![]()
:
Good thing OBs are not required for births to happen.
![]()
My son shows no signs of hyperactivity or anything like that so far, btw.
![]()
hapersmion
Good thing OBs are not required for births to happen.
My son shows no signs of hyperactivity or anything like that so far, btw.
hapersmion
4
Quote:
Thankfully we don't need an OB for births, you got that one right!
Yeah, I guess it's less 'risky' for a lawsuit with a csection than a vag breech..sounds sort of counter intuitive to me though...
Originally Posted by hapersmion That's what the OB said when he refused to attend my breech birth (first baby) - that he used to do them and think nothing of it, but now he was too scared to get sued. He said if something goes wrong because of a c-s, the courts won't generally find the doctor at fault because he was "doing all he could", but if anything went wrong during a vaginal breech birth, he would definitely be blamed. So I guess that's the reasoning a lot of them follow, even though it means a lot of moms get cut open to protect the doctors from lawsuit risk.
Good thing OBs are not required for births to happen.
My son shows no signs of hyperactivity or anything like that so far, btw.
hapersmion |
Yeah, I guess it's less 'risky' for a lawsuit with a csection than a vag breech..sounds sort of counter intuitive to me though...
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
